Backtesting Arena

Get Funding Rate Snapshot

arena_get_funding_rate

Are longs or shorts paying right now? Latest BTC perpetual funding rate, averaged across up to 4 exchanges (Binance, Bybit, OKX, Deribit; 8h settlement cadence). Returns the day's averaged value plus each exchange's own value (no moving average or Z-score — for the history use arena_get_funding_rate_history via arena_call_extended). Positive = longs pay shorts (bullish bias), negative = shorts pay longs (bearish bias). Read coverage before comparing values across dates: it says how many exchanges stand behind that day (4 = full average, 1 = a single exchange), and a day-over-day move can be a change in composition rather than in the market; venues_present/venues_missing name the exchanges. provenance grades the average (full = all exchanges, partial, thin = under half — never a basis for a verdict); fields="full" adds the venue spread in bps and the min/max interval of the venue values. A value of exactly 0.0001 (0.01 % per 8h) on many days is the exchanges' base-rate clamp on USDT perpetuals, not a cap in our pipeline: it means "no premium beyond the base rate", and values above it are real market readings. [Free tier]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`fields`	No	Omit for the default response, which carries `provenance` in short form (grade full/partial/thin, sources_used, sources_expected). 'full' adds the long form: sources_missing (named), sources (licence attribution names), grade_reason, as_of — plus per-part provenance where the composite has parts. A `thin` grade (under half the expected inputs) is never a basis for a verdict or a ranking.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 13, 2026

addedInput schema / $schema

Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

addedInput schema / properties / fields

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Omit for the default response, which carries `provenance` in short form (grade full/partial/thin, sources_used, sources_expected). 'full' adds the long form: sources_missing (named), sources (licence attribution names), grade_reason, as_of — plus per-part provenance where the composite has parts. A `thin` grade (under half the expected inputs) is never a basis for a verdict or a ranking.",
+  "enum": [
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 25, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / context

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): \"Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization.\"",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "context"
-]
```

First observedJul 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does: it explains sign semantics (positive = longs pay shorts), the `coverage`/`venues_present`/`venues_missing` fields, the `provenance` grading and that `thin` is never a basis for a verdict, and the 0.0001 base-rate clamp so an agent does not misread it as a pipeline cap. It also flags the free-tier status. This is unusually rich disclosure for a read tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Dense but front-loaded: the opening line states the resource and scope, then cavesats follow. The rhetorical hook 'Are longs or shorts paying right now?' is arguably decorative, and the passage is long, but nearly every sentence carries distinct behavioral information (coverage caution, provenance grade, base-rate clamp), so it justifies most of its length.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain the return shape — and it does: the day's averaged value, each exchange's own value, coverage metadata, and what fields="full" adds. Everything an agent needs to interpret the result correctly is present.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single `fields` enum, so the baseline is 3. The description earns above baseline by stating the concrete consequence of fields="full" — the venue spread in bps and the min/max interval of venue values — which is not spelled out the same way in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Latest BTC perpetual funding rate, averaged across up to 4 exchanges') and enumerates the venues and cadence. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling arena_get_funding_rate_history, so an agent can disambiguate without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: it says it returns no moving average or Z-score and routes the agent to arena_get_funding_rate_history (via arena_call_extended) for history. It also prescribes reading `coverage` before comparing values across dates, which is actionable usage guidance rather than mere description.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Backtesting Arena tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Get Funding Rate Snapshot

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

Resources